Originally Posted by jojo
In a way your post (from which the above point was taken) kind of argues in favor of the alternative conclusion. By this I mean that measuring the impact of Hernandez relative to the current iteration of the roster informs (or should at least in my view) subsequent decisions.
For instance, if the goal is the playoffs, the addition of Hernandez probably just eliminated a lot of potential options (like adding an Izturus or an Everett as the O's and Tigers have recently done) or if it hasn't eliminated them it signals the need for a huge upgrade somewhere else.
Since Hernandez cost no significant extra cash nor any frontline trading chips, it's an illogical leap to assume he's cost the club anything. How exactly has it eliminated anything other than other catching options?
Izturis and Everett (the former in whom I had some interest, the latter whom I consider one of the worst players alive) are off the market because other teams signed them, not because the Reds acquired Hernandez. Simply put, there is no connection.
Are sizable changes needed elsewhere? You bet. I believe I made that very point in my first post in this thread. That was always the case. The catcher acquisition wasn't going to be a singularly transformational event for the Reds. They weren't getting a star catcher this winter. That said, the club also couldn't afford to clod around with one foot stuck in a nothing-from-your-catcher bucket like it did last season.
This move signals nothing. There's nothing new the Reds need to do that they didn't need to do prior to the Hernandez acquisition. There is, however, one less thing to do.